Why do we have Governors in every State? | Explained

The story so far The Supreme Court on April 8, 2025 delivered a significant verdict delineating the powers of the President and the Governors, on the issue of grant of assent to Bills passed by State legislatures, under Articles 201 and 200 respectively of the Constitution. When the country was nearing Independence, almost every other document including the Commonwealth India Bill of 1925, the Nehru Report of 1928 and the Constitution of Hindustan Free State Act, an aspirational document prepared by the All India Hindu Mahasabha in 1944, advocated for adopting the westminster style of polity and insisted on retaining the office of the Governor. Article 163 of the Constitution states that the Governor shall exercise his functions on the aid and advise of a council of ministers headed by the Chief Minister “except in so far as he is by or under this Constitution required to exercise his functions or any of them in his discretion.” When the Constituent Assembly debated the necessity for providing such discretion to the Governor, B.R. He pointed out that the words intended to be included in Article 163 were ‘except in so far as he is by or under this Constitution’ and not ‘except wherever he thinks that he should exercise this power of discretion against the wishes or against the advice of the ministers.’ When the discussion turned towards Article 200, which mandates Governor’s assent to a Bill passed by the legislature for it to become an Act, Ambedkar himself moved an amendment on July 30, 1949 to remove the expression ‘in his discretion’ from the Article. Since neither Article 200 nor 201 lays down timeline for grant of assent, the court has prescribed timelines for the President as well as the Governor when it comes to granting assent to Bills.